swamps

[Doc o War]

I have made note that the union can freely jump into swamp regions and stay in them with little fear of the mosquito born diseases we know were there- Malaria was thought in the 1860s to be caused by the "bad Air" found in the swamp regions- Both Malaria and Yellow fever were commonly found in swamp areas of the South during those times. Commanders, and politicians alike thought it a poor idea to send men into swamp areas- because of the terrible attrition they suffered. A union unit garrisoning Key West during the civ war was so decimated by disease that the regiment was considered useless for service and eventually sent home- without ever firing a shot in anger they had taken huge casualties to disease.
There is an attrition roll possible in the winter in this game- very wise as diseases like influenza and fevers ravaged the armies during winter.
There should be some effect however - some attrition- to being in swamp hexes in non winter turns as well as winter normal attrition.
Is it possible to add an attrition roll to any unit in swamp land during non winter turns? Southern units tended to be a bit less effected- in fact union troops were about twice as effected- so perhaps a neg 1 attrition roll for southerners- and a neg 2 for union troops in swamp lands in non winter turns. All regions would have winter attrition as normal.
This should make commanders think twice about campaigning in swamps. In the real war both sides tried to not put much manpower into swamps.
Just a thought.

[Bo Rearguard]

Sounds like an reasonable idea. Might also dissuade those Union players who gobble up undefended and marshy southern Florida for all the cheap political points. [:D]

[JAMiAM]

The main problem that I see with this proposal is that there are several, very important regions that are also swamp terrain. Vicksburg, New Orleans, Jacksonville, Wilmington, Savannah, and New Bern, for example.

[Bo Rearguard]

Yeah. That would decimate southern garrisons. Perhaps such effects should be confined to swamp regions that don't have the moderating effect of civilization. Ones with few or no population points.

[Erik Rutins]

Yeah, I think something for unpopulated swamp areas might work, but implementing this for all "swamp" areas would be a problem. The scale of the map means that not all swamps are created equal as far as what they really signify.

[Joel Billings]

I am going to add to our list to incresae attrition in unpopulated swamp areas, with a bigger increase for northern units. I like this as it will decrease the desirability of the Florida land grab.

[Doc o War]

Indeed- I think the non populated regions was what I was meaning. Good call. Areas where citys and populated towns florished near or even in swampy ares tended to be less effected- if for no other reason than the land around them was more drained. Or that they were populated nearer the coastal region. And while even Charlestown and New Orleans had bouts of disease pass through, it was nothing compared to the truely deadly terrain found in places like the Lousianna Mississippi Delta and The Florida and Coastal Swamps. Like the Great Dismal. The Everglades.
   19th Century Soldiers and Officers and even Generals- looked at service in a swamp region as a near death sentence in this time period. I have read their letters and memoirs.  Many a senior commander passed on taking their troops- especially militias- into these deadly zones. It wasn't just a game mechanism, what would the folks back home think of a commander who lead all his boys into a deadly swamp and watched them all die off. This would be a ruling that would really reflect the danger of service in the regions.
    Except in winter- swamp disease was not found in USA winter- but then the standard winter attrition rule would kick in. All other non winter month turns in swamps in the 19th Century were dangerous. They really didnt stop being dangerous until they found a cure for Yellow Fever, but that was at the turn of the 20th century.  Not the 1860s.
    Malaria was serious and debilitating. I know this personally as I had Malaria in Vietnam while serving there in the Infantry in 1969/70. It could kill a man who was physically weak or malnourished- as Civ War soldiers often were.
     But Yellow Fever could Kill entire regiments. And quickly. It was a feared scourge.
      Good call on this idea game guys- I think it would make a fine addition to the game.
       

[John Neal]

There should be no garrison requirements in those areas, then.

[dakjck]

I do not understand why there should be no garrison requirement. Admittedly, if the area has a higher attrition rate, it would probably have less indigenous people. However, if the invader wants the political points or to trace supply/command over it, there would have to be some exercise of control, though such garrison should be relatively small. Swamps do provide good locations for guerillas. Remember the Swamp Fox from the earlier war? Alternatively, if the invader does not want to garrison a swamp, it could revert back to the original owner.

[John Neal]

dakjck -

Good points. I was thinking play-balance wise. After looking at the map there aren't many areas where supply lines would go through swamp that the Union would really need to garrison, so it won't be too bad.

[heroldje]

The games name for the region evades me, but the area that McClellan set up camp during his peninsula campaign should be included in these high attrition swamp areas.  Historically, he received a lot of heat for keeping his army there, and a lot of men fell to disease.

[Bo Rearguard]

ORIGINAL: heroldje

The games name for the region evades me, but the area that McClellan set up camp during his peninsula campaign should be included in these high attrition swamp areas.  Historically, he received a lot of heat for keeping his army there, and a lot of men fell to disease.

Sounds like it would be New Kent (woods terrain)or Fort Monroe (swamp) in the game.

[Doc o War]

It would be Fort Monroe Swamp- and keeping troops there should have a historical negative effect-It isnt really as safe as Charleston or Savanna would be- and there is historic evidence that the Union tried to move swiftly away from that swamp toward the New Kent zone. Even After McClellan fought past Yorktown and Williamsburg and moved on to Fair Oaks/Seven Pines Battle area<New Kent> the MAlaria effect still plauged him with daily sick lists that just grew and grew. That could have been because the men were infected earlier and left the swamps and sicken'd later. But the numbers of men USED UP as they used to say- was pretty staggering.
    Much like NApoleans Grand Army at Moscow 50 years prior- McClellans army at the end of the Seven Days Battles in July 62 was Used UP. Disease was a major factor.
   I have always been oppossed to the idea that large bodies of men could be safely held at Fortress Monroe with the known dangers at the time that the swamps for 40 miles inland were deadly dangerous- always had been. Thus no major towns. McCellan built up his army with the known historical knowledge that it was dangerous.  Union regiments that served in the Penninsula Campaign had very high incidents of Fevers and malarias. Riddled with swamp fevers they used to say. Especially at first when McCellan just sat there at Fort Monroe for a few weeks letting everyone get bitten while he organized his Grand Army for the Richmond drive.
   I would include Fort Monroe as a definate Swamp attrition hex.

[JAMiAM]

If, as Joel states above, the filter they use is unpopulated swamp regions, then Fort Monroe will be affected. However, this would also affect Elizabeth City, and Vicksburg.

[Doc o War]

true both areas would be swampy malarial hells, Elizabeth City and Vicksburg- Also Ft St Phillip and Ft JAckson on the Mouth of the Mississippi- All are 0 pop 0 resourced centers , but the confeds should be a bit more resistant than the Union- I think I would also exempt artillery- as losses in artillery units would be easier to maintain- given the smaller numbers of men and the fact that most armies kept their artillery units crewed up- over the infantry or cavalry.
The loss of manpower is most damaging to infantry and cav as numbers increase the combat capability. Gun crews can run reduced and still operate.
I think the leaders in a true swamp hex should take a check also- many got sick of malaria during the war.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: Doc o War

true both areas would be swampy malarial hells, Elizabeth City and Vicksburg- Also Ft St Phillip and Ft JAckson on the Mouth of the Mississippi- All are 0 pop 0 resourced centers , but the confeds should be a bit more resistant than the Union- I think I would also exempt artillery- as losses in artillery units would be easier to maintain- given the smaller numbers of men and the fact that most armies kept their artillery units crewed up- over the infantry or cavalry.
The loss of manpower is most damaging to infantry and cav as numbers increase the combat capability. Gun crews can run reduced and still operate.
I think the leaders in a true swamp hex should take a check also- many got sick of malaria during the war.

As it is already, Artillery doesn't suffer attrition, so no need to change anything there.